Music for a bad economy

Here’s something I read a week ago that has haunted me since and I wish I’d never read it: Beyoncé’s new single spells economic doom. I wonder if she feels responsible?

The idea is that (supposedly) whenever there’s been an economic downturn, it’s been preceded by a No. 1 song on the charts that has low “beat variance” (the beat doesn’t change much throughout the song). The economic drop in the early 80s was right after A-Ha’s “Take On Me”, and this time it’s Beyoncé’s “Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It)”. Sadly they don’t give any other examples in the article.

Of course, all chart hits the rest of the time are entirely unlike these ones. Oh, if I had the energy I’d go find some examples in order to disprove this theory, but it would require listening to Top 40 hits in order to determine their beat variance, and my tastes seem to go against the mainstream now that I’m no longer 12.

Isn’t there some correlation between skirt length and the economy? If so, we’re going to be showing less leg in the coming months or years. But if you watch Beyonce’s video you’ll notice the complete lack of skirt in herself and her two backup dancers. Wouldn’t that suggest a booming economy? Or maybe its swan song. Who knows.

I’ve been feeling a bit disturbed by that video since I saw it a month or so ago. By disturbed I mean, a mix of being turned on plus realizing I really need to get to the gym. That’s a lot of leg in that video. I sort of hope they’ve stretched it vertically and those chicks’ legs aren’t normally that insanely long.

Getting back to music, lately I’ve been trying to find more pop and otherwise cheerful music, to compensate I guess for my worry about money and my future. I can certainly see a post-crash movement towards lively, happy music, but that’s not particularly insightful to assume so; it just makes sense. My latest discovery is Val Emmich (MySpace). Here’s another video that makes me think I need to get back to the gym: